Don’t forget about Iran

The Washington Post

Concern is rampant in Congress, in Sunni states and Israel and throughout the U.S. foreign policy community that when the extended deadline for reaching a final deal rolls around, the president will either extend the deadline again or make a bad deal. Judging from their public declarations of bravado the Iranians may feel there is no reason to strike any deal. Graham notes, “If the Iranians believe there will be no military force [from the US] they will keep going.” Obama’s conduct elsewhere has only increased Iranian “moderate” President Hassan Rouhani’s contempt for the U.S (“Are Americans afraid of getting casualties on the ground in Iraq?” Rouhani said to NBC. “Are they afraid of their soldiers being killed in the fight they claim is against terrorism? . . . . Is it possible to reach a big goal without that? In all regional and international issues, the victorious one is the one who is ready to do sacrifice.” Give the devil his due; he’s right.)

In the case of another extension, Iran would continue its advanced research on centrifuges, low-grade enrichment (which can easily be increased), its ballistic missile program and slides into its status as a nuclear threshold state. The world loses interest.

But Obama is so desperate for a foreign policy “win” that he may be ready to give Iran nearly everything the mullahs want. Given that in the interim deal Obama already provided Iran with sanctions relief for no irreversible change in Iran’s nuclear program, implicitly recognized a right to enrich and held out the prospect for a sunset clause when Iran could one day be free from any limitations or inspections, there is good reason to suspect he’ll try his best to strike another deal. Only this time it will be a permanent one, and undoubtedly advantageous to Iran.

Is it possible to put a halt to this dangerous appeasement? As long as Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is majority leader, no vote will be conducted on sanctions in the Senate or anything else Iran-related. Graham says, “The only check and balance is to [force the White House] come to Congress for an up or down vote on a deal.” No Democrat seems interested in preventing a disastrous bargain – but perhaps after the election results are in they will join in a bipartisan effort to prevent a North Korea-type deal. If they choose instead to give Obama a blank check, they risk being handmaidens to a foreign to a foreign policy debacle, a Middle East nuclear arms race and the repudiation of bipartisan policy determined to dismantle Iran’s nuclear program.

It’s true sanctions are one tool we have to pressure Iran, but the backstop has always been the threat of military action. Nevertheless, the president doesn’t even bothering mentioning it these days. And if he did who would believe him? The Israelis are a different matter. Graham remarks, ““Unlike North Korea Iran has to be concerned about Israel. If not for Israel it would be smooth sailing [to get the bomb] for the Iranians.” It would then behoove Congress to begin authorizing advanced weapons to Israel (e.g. bunker busters) and other material aid that would raise the likelihood of Israeli action. Moreover, the Sunni monarchs are so freaked out by U.S. overtures to Iran and Syria they may show some regional solidarity and commence strategic planning. (The Saudis and the United Arab Emirates did act together against Libyan jihadists, but Iran is a different matter entirely.)

In any event, as Iran talks start up again, it would be wise to watch out for diplomatic blather. Chief negotiator Wendy Sherman (who made the deal that allowed North Korea to go nuclear) recently proclaimed, “We can say on the positive side that our talks have been serious and that we have identified potential answers to some key questions. . . [But] we remain far apart on other core issues, including the size and scope of Iran’s uranium enrichment capacity.” Well, there you have it — now we are just talking about how big an illicit nuke program Iran will have. (“‘On the question of enrichment we have practically made no progress,’ a senior Western diplomat said.”) That’s what you get when the president is frantic to get a deal, shows he has no spine (like the about-face on the red line in Syria) and effectively takes military action off the table.